PMCC PMCC

Search tips
Search criteria

Advanced
Results 1-2 (2)
 

Clipboard (0)
None

Select a Filter Below

Journals
Authors
Year of Publication
Document Types
1.  A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial of the Effects of Vitamin D Supplementation on Cardiovascular Disease Risk 
PLoS ONE  2012;7(5):e36617.
Vitamin D (VitD) supplementation has been advocated for cardiovascular risk reduction; however, supporting data are sparse. The objective of this study was to determine whether VitD supplementation reduces cardiovascular risk. Subjects in this prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of post-menopausal women with serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations >10 and <60 ng/mL were randomized to Vitamin D3 2500 IU or placebo, daily for 4 months. Primary endpoints were changes in brachial artery flow-mediated vasodilation (FMD), carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (PWV), and aortic augmentation index (AIx). The 114 subjects were mean (standard deviation) 63.9 (3.0) years old with a 25-hydroxyvitamin D level of 31.3 (10.6) ng/mL. Low VitD (<30 ng/mL) was present in 47% and was associated with higher body-mass index, systolic blood pressure, glucose, CRP, and lower FMD (all p<0.05). After 4 months, 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels increased by 15.7 (9.3) ng/mL on vitamin D3 vs. −0.2 (6.1) ng/mL on placebo (p<0.001). There were no significant differences between groups in changes in FMD (0.3 [3.4] vs. 0.3 [2.6] %, p = 0.77), PWV (0.00 [1.06] vs. 0.05 [0.92] m/s, p = 0.65), AIx (2.7 [6.3] vs. 0.9 [5.6] %, p = 0.10), or CRP (0.3 [1.9] vs. 0.3 [4.2] mg/L, p = 0.97). Multivariable models showed no significant interactions between treatment group and low VitD status (<30 ng/mL) for changes in FMD (p = 0.65), PWV (p = 0.93), AIx (p = 0.97), or CRP (p = 0.26).In conclusion, VitD supplementation did not improve endothelial function, arterial stiffness, or inflammation. These observations do not support use of VitD supplementation to reduce cardiovascular disease risk.
Trial Registration
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00690417
Trial Registration
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01049048
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0036617
PMCID: PMC3346736  PMID: 22586483
2.  Current Status of Clinical 25-hydroxyvitamin D Measurement: An Assessment of Between-Laboratory Agreement 
Background
Historically, methodological differences and lack of standardization led to between-laboratory variability in 25(OH)D results. Recent observations raised concern about persisting variability. This quality assurance exercise investigated 25(OH)D result comparability between laboratories.
Methods
Serum pools (n = 25) were prepared to contain endogenous 25(OH)D2 and 25(OH)D3 at 25(OH)D concentrations from ∼12-150 nmol/L (5-60 ng/mL). Aliquots were sent to 8 laboratories utilizing various 25(OH)D assay methods including high performance liquid chromatography with ultraviolet detection (LC-UV), LC with tandem mass spectroscopy detection (LC-MS/MS) or an automated immunoassay (Diasorin Liaison). The LC-UV results were selected as a referent to which all others were compared using linear regression and Bland-Altman analysis.
Results
Good correlation (R2 = 0.87 to 0.97) was observed for all laboratories. Modest systematic bias was observed for some laboratories ranging from a positive mean bias of 10.5 nmol/L (4.2 ng/mL) to a negative mean bias of 3.5 nmol/L (1.4 ng/mL). For the laboratory with the greatest bias, 22/25 results were numerically higher (mean +15.7%) than LC-UV results. For Liaison, the primary error was likely random, whereas the major LC-MS/MS assay error source were biases likely due to calibration issues.
Conclusions
Modest inter-laboratory variability persists in serum 25(OH)D measurement. The National Institute of Standards & Technology 25(OH)D Standard Reference and calibration materials will further improve between-laboratory agreement for chromatography-based assays.
doi:10.1016/j.cca.2010.08.018
PMCID: PMC3058672  PMID: 20713030
Vitamin D; 25-hydroxyvitamin D; measurement; ergocalciferol; cholecalciferol

Results 1-2 (2)